Posts Tagged ‘Pelosi’

Congress Gets Pay Raise As Americans Face Bad Economy

// December 21st, 2008 // No Comments » // ECONOMY, POLITICAL ARENA

The very people that helped cause the bad economy that we are facing are due to get a $4,700 dollar raise. That my friends is B.S. When are the American people going to hold these idiots accountable for what they do?

During the argument for the now failed $750 billion dollar bailout Congress brainwashed Americans into hating CEOs everywhere. They demanded pay cuts for all CEOs in any sector of business that was receiving a bailout or failing. It’s high time for a pay cut for these bastards in Congress!

Congressmen make an average of $169 thousand a year. Pelosi makes $217 thousand a year. Are you freaking kidding me? They punish CEOs for failing, yet our country has a 10 trillion dollar debt. If that’s not failure I don’t know what is.

The raises take affect in January. Do you think these selfish thieves will even consider turning down the raise? There may be a few that will turn it down in order to score political points, but as a whole these liberal windbags will gladly take OUR money to the tune of 2.5 million dollars!

Outraged yet?

Transcript: Pelosi’s Speech Moments Before Bailout Bill Fails

// September 30th, 2008 // 3 Comments » // ECONOMY, Featured Articles

Text of a speech given by Speaker Nancy Pelosi moments before the Bailout Bill was voted down.

Madam speaker, when was the last time anyone ever asked you for $700 billion? It’s a staggering figure. And many questions have arisen from that request. And we have been hearing, I think, a very informed debate on all sides — of — of this issue here today. I’m proud of the debate.

$700 billion. A staggering number. But only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness. When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton’s surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned that around.

And now eight years later, the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today. They claim to be free market advocates, when it’s really an anything goes mentality. No regulation, no supervision, no discipline. And if you fail, you will have a golden parachute, and the taxpayer will bail you out.

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect. Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, it can create many good things in our economy. But in this case, in its unbridled form, as encouraged, supported, by the Republicans — some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos.

And it is that chaos that the secretary of the Treasury and the chairman of the Fed came to see us just about a week and a half ago — seems like an eternity, doesn’t it, so much has happened, the news was so bad. They described a very, very dismal situation. A dismal situation describing the state of our economy, the fragility of our financial institutions and the instability of our markets, our equity markets, our credit markets, our bond market.

And here we were listening to people who knew of what they spoke. Secretary of the Treasury brings long credentials and knowledge of the markets. More fearful, though, to me, more scary, was the statement — were the statements of Chairman Bernanke [Ben S. Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve], because Chairman Bernanke is probably one of the foremost authorities in America on the subject of the Great Depression. I don’t know what was so great about the Depression, but that’s the name they give it. And we heard the secretary and the chairman tell us that this was a once in a hundred year phenomenon, this fiscal crisis was so drastic. Certainly once in 50 years, probably once in a hundred years.

And how did it sneak up on us? So silently, almost on little cat feet. That they would come in on that day — and they didn’t actually ask for the money, that much money that night. It took two days until we saw the legislation that they were proposing to help calm the markets. And it was on that day that we learned of a $700 billion request.

But it wasn’t just the money that was alarming. It was the nature of the legislation. It gave the secretary of the Treasury czar-like powers, unlimited powers, latitude to do all kinds of things and specifically prohibited judicial review or review of any other federal administrative agency to review their actions.

Another aspect of it that was alarming is it gave the secretary the power to use any money that came back from these infusions of cash to be used at the discretion of the secretary. Not to reduce the deficit, not to go into the general funds so that we could afford other priorities. To be used at the discretion of the secretary. It was shocking. Working together in a bipartisan way, we were able to make major improvements on that proposal, even though its fundamental basis was almost arrogant and insulting.

The American people responded almost immediately. Overwhelmingly, they said they know that something needs to be done. Say 78 percent of the American people said Congress must act. Fifty-eight-some percent said, but not to accept the Bush proposal. And so here we are today, a week later and a couple of days later, coming to the floor with a product — not a bill that I would have written, one that has major disappointments with me, beginning with the fact that it does not have bankruptcy in this bill — and we will continue to persist and work to achieve that.

It’s interesting, though, to me that when they describe this, the magnitude of the challenge and the precipice that we were on and how we had to act quickly and we had to act boldly and we had to act now, that it never occurred to them that the consequences of this market were being felt well in advance by the American people. And unemployment is up, and therefore we need unemployment insurance. That jobs are lacking, and therefore we need a stimulus package. So how can on the one hand could this be so urgent at the moment, and yet so unnecessary for us to address the effects of this poor economy in the households of America across our country?

We’ll come back to that in a moment. Working together, we put together some standards — and I am really proud of what Barney Frank did in this regard. The first night, that night, that Thursday night, when we got the very, very dismal news, he immediately said, if we’re going to do this — and Spencer Bachus was a part of this as well — in terms of if we’re going to do this, we must have equity for the American people. We’re putting up $700 billion, we want the American people to get some of the upside. So equity, fairness for the American people.

Secondly, if they were describing the root of the problem as the mortgage-backed securities, Barney insisted that we would have forbearance on foreclosure. If we’re now going to own that paper, that we would then have forbearance to help responsible homeowners stay in their home.

In addition to that, we have to have strong, strong oversight. We didn’t even have to see the $700 billion or the full extent of their bill to know that we needed equity and upside for the taxpayer, forbearance for the homeowner, oversight of the government on what they were doing, and something that the American people understand full well, an end to the golden parachutes and the — a — review and reform of the compensation for C.E.O.’s.

Let’s get this straight. We have a situation where on Wall Street people are flying high, they are making unconscionable amounts of money. They make a lot of money, they privatize the gain, the minute things go tough, they nationalize the risk. They get a golden parachute as they drive their firm into the ground, and the American people have to pick up the tab. Something is very, very wrong with this picture.

So just on first blush, that Thursday night, we made it clear, meeting much resistance on the part of the administration, that those four things, equity, forbearance, oversight, and reform of compensation. Overriding all of this is a protection of the taxpayer. We need to stabilize the markets. In doing so, we need to protect the taxpayers.

And that’s why I’m so glad that this bill contains a suggestion made by Mr. Tanner [Representative John Tanner, Democrat of Tennessee] that if at the end of the day, say in five years, when we can take a review of the success or whatever of this initiative, that if there is a shortfall and we don’t get our whole $700 billion back that we have invested, that there will be an initiative to have the financial institutions that benefited from this program to make up that shortfall.

But not one penny of this should be carried by the American people. People asked, and Mr. Spratt [Representative John M. Spratt Jr., Democrat of South Carolina] spoke with great knowledge and eloquence on the budget and aspects of the budget. $700 billion, what is the impact, what is the opportunity cost for our country of the investments that we would want to make?

O.K., now we have it in place where the taxpayer is going to be made whole and that was very important for us. But why on the drop of a hat can they ask us for $700 billion, and we couldn’t get any support from the administration on a stimulus package that would also help grow the economy?

People tell me all over the world that the biggest emerging market, economic market in the world, is rebuilding the infrastructure of America. Roads, bridges, waterways, water systems in addition to waterways. The grid, broadband, schools, housing, certain schools. We are trillions of dollars in deficit there.

We know what we need to do to do it in a fiscally sound way, in a fiscally sound way that creates good-paying jobs in America immediately. Brings money into the treasury by doing so, and again does all of this in an all-American way. Good-paying jobs here in America.

We can’t get the time of day for 25, $35 billion for that, which we know guarantees jobs, et cetera, but $700 billion. So make no mistake, when this Congress adjourns today to observe Rosh Hashanah and have members go home for a bit, we are doing so at the call of the chair. Because this subject is not over, this discussion about how we save our economy.

And we must insulate Main Street from Wall Street. And as Congresswoman Waters [Representative Maxine Waters, Democrat of California] said, Martin Luther King Drive, in my district Martin Luther King Drive, and Cedar Chavez Road and all of the manifestations of community and small businesses in our community. We must insulate them from that. And so we have difficult choices, and so many of the things that were said on both sides of this issue in terms of its criticisms of the bill we have and the bill that we had at first, and the very size of this, I share. You want to go home, so I’m not going to list all of my concerns that I have with it.

But it just comes down to one simple thing. They have described a precipice. We are on the brink of doing something that might pull us back from that precipice. I think we have a responsibility. We have worked in a bipartisan way. I want to acknowledge Mr. Blunt and Mr. Boehner, the work that we have done together, trying to find as much common ground as possible on this.

But we insisted the taxpayer be covered. We all insisted that we have a party-is-over message to Wall Street. And we insisted that, that taxpayers at risk must recover — that any risk must be recovered. I told you that already. So, my colleagues, let’s recognize that this Congressional — this legislation is not the end of the line.

Mr. Waxman [Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California] will be having vigorous oversight this week, hearings this week on regulatory reform and other aspects of it. I hope you will pursue fraud and mismanagement and the rest. Mr. Frank and his committee will continue to pursue other avenues that we can stabilize the markets and protect the taxpayer. For too long, this government, in eight years, has followed a right-wing ideology of anything goes, no supervision, no discipline, no regulation.

Again, all of us are believers in free markets, but we have to do it right. Now, let me again acknowledge the extraordinary leadership of Mr. Frank. He has been an exceptional leader in the Congress, but never has his knowledge and his experience and his judgment been more needed than now. And I thank you, Mr. Frank, for your exceptional leadership, Mr. Chairman.

I also — so many people worked on this, but I also want to acknowledge the distinguished chair of our caucus, Mr. Emanuel. His knowledge of the markets, the respect he commands on those subjects, and his boundless energy on the subjects served us well in these negotiations. But this, this is a bipartisan initiative that we are bringing to the floor. We have to have a bipartisan vote on this. That is the only message that will send a message of confidence to the markets.

So I hope that — I know that we will be able to live up to our side of the bargain. I hope the Republicans will, too.

But my colleagues, as you go home and see your families and observe the holiday and the rest, don’t get settled in too far, because as long as the American — this challenge is there for the American people, the threat of losing their jobs, the credit, their credit, their jobs, their savings, their retirement, the opportunity for them to send their children to college.

As long as in the households of America, this crisis is being felt very immediately and being addressed at a different level, we must come back, and we will come back as soon and as often as it is necessary to make the change that is necessary. And before long we will have a new Congress, a new president of the United States, and we will be able to take our country in a new direction.

MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion

Democratic-led Congress Passes Phony Drilling Bill

// September 17th, 2008 // No Comments » // ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Pelosi and her fellow comrades think you’re stupid. Today Congress passed a phony drilling bill that allows offshore drilling within 50 miles off shore with state permission. The problem is that 88 percent of the 18 billion barrels of oil said to be under banned waters will stay off limits due to the likely scenario of state’s refusing to allow drilling.

The bill also imposes royalties and removes tax breaks for for the oil and gas industry. I suppose that Pelosi doesn’t understand that if taxes are raised on companies and industries then the rate hike gets passed to the consumer.

Although some Republicans voted in favor of the bill, most likely to avoid claims that they voted against offshore drilling, the majority of republicans are accusing Pelosi and her comrades of deceiving Americans in order to appear to support drilling during the election.

President Bush has said that he will veto the bill. Once that happens liberals and Democrats will point the finger at Bush as the reason there is no offshore drilling.

Don’t let Pelosi get away with this. Call her office: 202-225-0100. Let her know that you are not fooled.

MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion

Pelosi: Bush Is “A Total Failure.”

// July 18th, 2008 // 7 Comments » // WAR ON TERROR

  Speaker Pelosi called President Bush a “total failure” Thursday in reaction to Bush’s remarks two days earlier in which he took the Democratic run Congress to task for not doing their, “fundamental job.”

Pelosi’s Own Words:

“God bless him, bless his heart, president of the United States –a total failure, losing all credibility with the American people on the economy, on the war, on energy, you name the subject,”

Can you not feel the hate in that quote? This is a woman who is bent on pushing her liberal agenda and has finally snapped.

She refuses to believe that we are winning the war in Iraq. She has called for withdrawal and defeat numerous times. She has failed not only the American people in the war, but also the soldiers who are putting their life on the line so she can call for their defeat.

She promised that the Democratic run Congress would lower gas prices. That was in 2006. Another failure by Pelosi. Oil prices however have dropped in the last few days due to a combination of Bush lifting the executive ban on drilling and increased supply due to Americans forgoing the pump because of the high prices. It’s interesting that an increase supply lowers the price. Is that not what we have been asking for? If we Drill Here, Drill Now, our supply will increase; in turn lowering gas prices. The Democrats would have us believe that this decrease in price would not happen because it will take 5 years to get the oil. Bush simply lifted a ban that does nothing until the Democrats in Congress vote with Republicans to lift the ban, but the price still dropped. This is due in part to speculators. 73% of Americans want us to drill, but Pelosi has failed to listen to them.

I called Speaker Pelosi’s office earlier this week to express my dissatisfaction with her polices concerning drilling. The call went something like this:

Pelosi’s Office- “Speaker Pelosi’s office.”

Me- “I have a couple of questions I wanted to ask Speaker Pelosi. Is she available?”

Pelosi’s Office-”Umm, you can leave a message on her voicemail.”

Me- “I tried that the other day, it was full. Are you able to answer questions concerning her policies?”

Pelosi’s Office- “What was the question?”

Me- “In 2006 Speaker Pelosi said the Democrats had a plan to lower gas prices. Is that correct?”

Pelosi’s Office- “Yes that is.”

Me- “Well the prices are still high. Is there a new plan?”

Pelosi’s Office – “You can go to her website for policy information.”

I went to the website today and found the usual propaganda that she has been spreading, but I decided I’d reach out to Pelosi one last time. I sent an email to her under the “contact us” page on her site. Here’s my email:

Speaker Pelosi, When you find the time will you please answer the following questions?
1) In 2006 you promised the American people that the Democrats had a plan to lower gas prices. Since you and your party have taken over Congress gas prices have skyrocketed. When will you apologize to the American people for lying to them?
2) According to American Solutions, 73% of Americans support offshore drilling yet you continue to ignore their wishes. Why do you ignore the people for whom you work?
3) Have you forgotten that you are to serve the American people’s interest and not your own?

You recently called President Bush a failure. Congress’s approval rating has reached a record low of just 18%. That is lower than the President’s approval rating. It seems as though you are the failure.

I left my email address along with my name. If I receive a response I will post it here on MonkeyCrash. I have a feeling, however, that Speaker Pelosi will fail in responding.

MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion.

 

Pelosi Against Drill Here, Drill Now.

// July 14th, 2008 // 5 Comments » // ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

As a supporter of Drill Here, Drill Now it’s fascinating that Congress has sat by and done nothing as the cost of gas continues to rise. President Bush again urged Congress on Friday to act before its August break to open new areas for oil exploration in the United States to help ease record high oil prices.

President Bush:

“The members of Congress, particularly the Democratic leadership, must address this issue before they go home for this upcoming August break.”"They have a responsibility to explain to their constituents why we should not be drilling for more oil here in America to take the pressure off of gasoline prices.” “One way to deal with supply problems is to increase supply here in America.” “And yet the Democratic leaders of Congress just consistently block opening up these lands for exploration.”

Didn’t the Democrats have a plan to lower gas prices? That’s what Nancy Pelosi said in 2006. “Democrats have a plan to lower gas prices…join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.” Does anyone feel lied to yet? Pelosi has been playing politician of late “calling” on President Bush to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Excuse me Speaker Pelosi, but have not the American people along with the President been calling on you and your party to allow offshore drilling? It is your party that is standing in the way of lowering gas prices.

As tensions continue to rise with Iran so will gas prices. We need to drill for oil now more than ever. The Democrats still do not understand the situation that we are in nor do they care as evident by Speaker Pelosi’s own words “This call for drilling in areas that are protected is a hoax.” “It’s an absolute hoax on the part of the Republicans and this Bush administration.” She then went on to blame the Republicans and the Bush administration, “It’s a decoy to punt your attention away from the fact that their policies have produced $4-a-gallon gasoline.” Apparently she has not seen this graph.

The common propaganda spewed by Speaker Pelosi and her Leftist friends are statements such as, “The oil companies already have 68 million acres of land that they aren’t drilling; let them drill those first.” And then there is, “Even if we start drilling for oil now it will take years before we see any impact on price.”

In response, I have decided to share the facts concerning these and other popular myths from the Left. The following is from American Solutions.

Why a “Drill Here, Drill Now” Approach Will Help America Pay Less at the Pump

Is more drilling for American oil an essential part of lowering energy costs and freeing us from dependence on foreign sources of energy? The typical response of critics is a resounding “NO!” and includes several common arguments, which are not supported by the facts.

MYTH: Oil companies currently have 68 million acres of leased public lands that contain large amounts of economically recoverable oil available. Drilling in these areas could generate 4.8 million barrels a day so opening up more land is not necessary.

FACT: The estimates on the amount of oil available in those 68 million acres have been derived by assuming that the unused acres can produce the same amount as those acres being used. However, much of the land leased to oil companies has already been explored and determined not to carry enough recoverable oil to justify drilling. This is in stark contrast to the other 97% of currently banned offshore resources and areas with shale oil, where enormous quantities are known to exist.

That opponents to greater U.S. exploration believe they understand better than petroleum engineers how we obtain oil from drilling is absolutely ridiculous.

MYTH: Drilling will not provide any short-term relief in the price of oil because it will take many years before new drilling will lead to new supplies.

FACT: This same argument has been used for the past several decades to prevent us from using more of our American oil, leading to our current dependence on foreign oil and the supply crunch we are currently experiencing. Does this mean critics of greater American energy exploration were wrong 10 years ago, 20 years ago, and 30 years ago but are suddenly right today now?

Drilling more now will increase supplies in the future. And higher supplies lead to lower prices. Currently, the world is operating at or near full capacity, so there is very little slack in the system, and any disruption causes spike in price. This is partly why commodities and other investors have invested so heavily in oil, driving up prices. They recognize demand will continue to increase and that current supply has artificial limits, especially in the United States.

Opening up new oil fields in the U.S., even if new supplies won’t actually reach our gas tank for several years, would immediately impact the amount of upward speculation on long-term commodity investment in oil. Oil speculators will see a greater supply ahead and will see that the future of oil is less constrained on the supply side. Moreover, fears of Middle Eastern turmoil or South American unrest that could disrupt supply shipments will be much less of a reason to drive up the price of crude if a stable U.S. can supply millions of barrels of additional oil. Which represents a more stable source of oil, Colorado or Caracas?

Finally, nobody is suggesting that our nation’s energy strategy should be solely dependent on domestic production of oil. We all recognize that alternative energy sources – such as wind and solar – need to be developed. But more American oil must be a part of an American energy solution.

MYTH: The U.S. only has a small percentage (from 2-6%) of the world’s oil supplies, and since oil is a global commodity, our increased production won’t affect prices much if at all.

FACT: This estimate of 2-6% of the world’s oil supplies does not hold up to scrutiny.

In oil shale alone, found in the Green River Formation in parts of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming, the U.S. has approximately 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil, or over three times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia. This comes from a midpoint estimate in a 2005 RAND study done at the request of the Department of Energy, and a higher end estimate puts the number at over one trillion barrels.

Furthermore, there are vast areas of the United States and its outer continental shelf where it is illegal to even look for oil. Exploration routinely yields additional resources far larger than initial estimates.

Resources from oil shale and additional oil resources that are likely to be discovered are not included in the estimates of American oil supplies.

MYTH: Drilling offshore will lead to ocean spillage, damaging wildlife and beaches.

FACT: In fact, virtually all of the pollution and “spillage” comes from large tankers transporting oil from other countries and natural seepages. Thus, drilling for our American oil would actually reduce the risk of oil pollution by reducing the number of international oil tankers entering our ports.

Offshore spills have occurred, but offshore drilling companies have an exceptional record of preventing spills and minimizing environmental damage, due primarily to technological innovation. Norway, which is a major exporter of oil and acquires all of it from offshore, also has an outstanding record of drilling in the sea, and there’s no reason why we would take fewer precautions than the Norwegians. Everyone promoting offshore drilling wants to do it in compliance with environmental safeguards, which in the United States are some of the most stringent in the world.

This is unlike other nations, such as China, which announced a partnership with Cuba in 2006 to start drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. That nation’s dismal environmental record should force Congress to make a decision: Do we let another nation drill for oil near us and risk major environmental catastrophe, or do we do it ourselves with better environmental protection?

MYTH: The price of oil has increased due to “over-speculation” by energy commodities traders and outlawing or heavily regulating energy trading is the best way to dramatically reduce the price of oil.

FACT: When analyzing the effect of speculators on the price of oil it is important to distinguish between the activity of a healthy commodity futures market and “over-speculation.”

A healthy commodities futures market responds to the supply and demand realities of actual commodity suppliers and consumers. As Robert Murphy from the Institute for Energy Research explains, a healthy futures market can be a stabilizing influence on oil. By buying when prices are low and selling when prices are high, speculators actually push up the low prices and push down the high prices. America wants a healthy futures market on the price of oil.

So oil speculation does play a role in the price of oil. Single-day price spikes from supply disruption fears, for example, are often the work of speculation, but the price typically readjusts. The key question, then, is if “over-speculation” is occurring. “Over-speculation” in a futures market is when activity in the speculative markets themselves cause an artificial, higher demand for a commodity that does not reflect the demand of actual consumers. This causes an artificial, real-world price increase.

So have oil speculators distorted the global demand for oil, leading to the sharp price rise?

The data suggest not. If the price of oil truly was above the natural level dictated by supply and demand, we would see an increase in global inventory of oil. This is because when prices rise, production increases and consumer demand falls. If the speculative markets were adding extra demand to the market, all that oil purchased would have to be stockpiled somewhere. However, there is no evidence of any such hoarding, meaning that commercial consumers are purchasing every barrel produced. By definition, that means that the price is in line with real-world supply and demand. Despite the rise in prices, consumers continue to buy, meaning supply and demand fundamentals are in line. This means the speculative markets are functioning as they should and are not having a distorting effect on the price of oil.

Furthermore, long-term bets that the price of oil will rise rather than fall on the New York Mercantile Exchange have dropped over four fold since the price of a barrel went above $100. Traders are now shorting oil almost as much as they are betting on its price increase in the long term. Again, this data suggests that the speculative markets are functioning as they should.

So if the energy futures markets are operating as they should, passing new laws outlawing or more heavily regulating these markets will do nothing to lower the price of oil in the intermediate or long term. In fact, it would likely have two effects that could actually drive up the price of oil.

First, new regulations would reduce the stabilizing impact futures markets play on the price of oil described above. Second, they would likely drive energy futures markets outside of the United States, where they would be even less regulated than before. The loss of this financial activity would hurt America’s already sluggish economy, weakening the dollar even more. Considering that the decline of the value of the dollar has been estimated to account for as much as 30% of the recent surge in oil prices, the long run effect of would be to raise the price of oil even more.

So if you want the price of oil to be more volatile and ensure that Dubai and Singapore become the future centers of commodities trading, passing new laws heavily regulating the energy futures trading is a great idea. However, it will not lower gas prices.

MYTH: Drilling for unconventional sources, such as tar sands or shale oil, is too costly and creates a large carbon footprint, among other environmental problems.

FACT: The aforementioned RAND study demonstrated that if the price of a barrel of oil was as “high” as $90, current technology would make oil shale competitive in the market. With a barrel of oil approaching $140, the notion that extracting oil from shale is too expensive is simply untrue.

The environmental footprint argument would make more sense were it not for recent innovations by companies like Shell Oil, which has developed an in-situ method for extracting shale oil that would use relatively little water and does not involve making creators on wide portions of land. Instead, heating rods are stuck into the earth that heat the shale and then oil falls into a pool below to be collected. It should also be noted that early research suggests this method could be competitive even if oil was as cheap as $25 per barrel.

However, opponents of oil drilling are blocking further attempts to innovate through an amendment to an omnibus spending bill from December that prevents any further leasing on public lands with oil shale.

It is telling that opponents to greater U.S. exploration would choose to block shale oil development through a rider to a several hundred page spending bill instead of through separate legislation that could be debated purely on the merits of the specific proposal.

It’s high time we stop letting politicians like Pelosi and her comrades get away with ignoring the American people. Go to American Solutions and join the other 1 million free thinkers who have signed the Drill Here, Drill Now petition.

MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion.

Democrats Block Republican Attempts To Drill Offshore

// June 25th, 2008 // 6 Comments » // ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

The elitist Democrats have once again shown their true colors.  House Democrats failed to resurrect a bill to punish price gouging at the gas pump, while maneuvering to block Republican attempts to expand offshore drilling.

It’s evident that the Democrats are out of touch with the American people. They are fine with the high price that we are paying at the pump. They have successfully put the vote off until later this summer. “Someone’s afraid that we’ll send a message” and lift the drilling ban, Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, the ranking Republican on the Appropriations panel, said Tuesday. “We have the votes,” maintained Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., sponsor of the pro-drilling measure that would open waters 50 miles offshore to oil companies. But he said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California “will do everything she can do to stalemate it.”

Is this the “change” that the Democratic party is offering? Why aren’t they listening to the American people? A new Zogby poll from this weekend reveals that 74% of Americans support offshore oil drilling, including 90% of Republicans, 75% of independents, and 58% of Democrats–majorities of each party. In addition, the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less campaign has received more than a million signatures, yet the American Left continue to deny the wishes of the American people.

How long can you afford to pay these gas prices? How long will you let the Democrats force you to pay over $4.00 for a gallon of gas? If you want real change it’s time to let them hear you. Call your congressman, sign the Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less petition, Let Obama know that you will not be voting for him. A vote for Obama is a vote for higher gas prices.

MonkeyCrash is Your Source For Conservative Opinion.